Hello, On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 10:14:08AM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > I still think acpi table info should be available earlier, but I do not > think I can convince you on this. This can be religious debate. I'm curious. If there aren't substantial enough benefits, why would you still want to pull it earlier when it brings in things like initrd override and crafting the code carefully so that it's safe to execute it from different address modes and so on? Please note that x86 is not ia64. The early environment is completely different not only technically but also in its diversity and suckiness. It wasn't too long ago that vendors were screwing up ACPI left and right. It has been getting better but there's a reason why, for example, we still consider e820 to be the authoritative information over ACPI. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
